Creationism Quotes

Quotations are selected from this pool (and other quotation pools)
in a pseudorandom way every hour
and inserted at the top and bottom of some of the major pages on this website.
Feel free to copy any of these quotes and paste them for whatever purpose you please,
including on your own website, blog, social media page or forum debate posts.

Creationism in Schools

I’m against creationism being taught in schools because there is empirical evidence it is a silly
notion.

~ Jim Al-Khalili(born:1962-09-20 age:54)

Blind Charges At Darwin

Darwinism explains only the least interesting changes and modifications in physical structure: it does not
explain the movement of life or its manifest direction towards excellence; and as to origins and as to the final
destination of all this vast and orderly movement of life, it is dumb.

~ Edward Harold Begbie(born:1871 died:1929 at age:58)

I find that an odd way to attack Darwin. I doubt Begbie ever read more than a few pages of Darwin,
just read about him from fellow Christians. Darwin goes on at length in his books to explain
natural selection, the progressive adaptation to environment, the reaction to
competition, or as Begbie would term it manifest direction towards excellence. Begbie
apparently does not understand that evolution/natural selection is like a blind worm, tormented by brambles
(predators, illness) every time it makes a move. It naturally moves to better places, bit by tiny bit, without any
planning. You don’t have to be brilliant to make progress, given enough time. Evolution has millions of years
to work with. Even with an IQ (Intelligence Quotient) of 1, (the approximate computation power of the process of natural selection) you
can still have impressive results.

Separation of Church and State

The establishment of religion clause of the First Amendment means at least this:
Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid
all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can it force nor influence a person to go to or to
remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person
can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or
non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or
institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a
state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations
or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was
intended to erect a wall of separation between Church and State.

Despite this ruling, there have been many violations including faith-based initiatives, teaching
of creationism and subsidies to faith-based schools. Black apparently did allow the state to subsidise churches by
providing them services such as sewer, water, fire and police without paying taxes.

The Flintstones

These people [the Christians] watched the Flintstones as if it were a documentary.

~ Lewis Black(born:1948-08-30 age:68)

Describing creationists who insist dinosaurs and humans wandered the earth together 6000 years ago.

To Be Consistent

If they [creationist politicians] truly believe that the scientific evidence behind the accepted age of the
earth is questionable, then to be consistent they should:

Stop using the GPS (Global Positioning System)
unit in their automobile because it crucially relies on the constancy of satellite-borne atomic clocks, which
constancy is a consequence of quantum mechanics. GPS
technology also relies crucially on Einstein’s relativity.

Toss their smartphone because the engineering behind its components relies crucially on quantum
mechanics.

For that matter, stop using any item with built-in semiconductor devices, since they are all similarly
designed based on quantum mechanical principles. Nowadays, this means a vast number of manufactured items,
including every new automobile now on the market.

No Crocoducks

All throughout the fossil record and life, we don’t find one of these; a Crocoduck. There’s just
nothing like it!

~ Kirk Cameron(born:1970-10-12 age:46)

A crocoduck is a duck with
a crocodile head. Mr. Cameron, the former child actor and Christian evangelist, seems to think the absence of such
creatures slam dunk debunks evolution and proves the Christian creationist view. Huh? The dimwit is under the
delusion that evolutionary theory predicts you should find intermediate chimeras between any two extant creatures.
Clearly he has not read even one book on the subject he makes a living debunking. Perhaps, as a child actor, he
early became confused between being a doctor and playing one on TV.

The Fuzzy Criterion

When I think about science it feels cold and heartless. When I think about creationism I feel warm and fuzzy.
Therefore, in my opinion, creationism is true.

~ A Creationist

When think of brain surgery, I get the shivers. That does not make it false. When I think of My
Little Pony, I feel warm and cuddly. That does not mean it exists other than in fiction. When I think of
creationism, I feel nauseous because it is a monstrous lie harming all sorts of people. When I think of science, I
feel excited. Every day it comes up with something that reduces suffering. Further, every part of it I have studied
rings true.

Why Are There Monkeys

If monkeys turned into people, why are there still monkeys?

~ A. Creationist

This question comes up over and over. It makes no sense to an evolutionist. Evolutionists tend to
treat it as creationists just jerking them around. I will give creationists the benefit of the doubt and assume
they have multiple misconceptions caused by exposure to misinformation from creationist websites. First, monkeys
did not turn into people. A common ancestor of monkeys and humans had offspring that
over millions of years drifted in two directions, toward monkeys and toward humans. No individual creature morphed
into anything else, like a werewolf. Offspring were just imperceptibly different from their parents, generation
after generation. Think of your own family. You and your brother differ slightly and you each differ slightly from
your parents. Each of you could well be the founder of a large tree of descendants. There is no reason both you and
your brother’s tree could not thrive. The monkey family and the human family both thrived. Monkeys
specialised for tree life. Humans specialised for savannah life. Humans and monkeys thus did not strongly compete
with each other so both managed to hang in there even until the present day.

I Did Not Come From No Monkey

But we must not fall into the error of supposing that the early progenitor of the whole Simian stock, including
man, was identical with, or even closely resembled any existing ape or monkey.

~ Charles Darwin(born:1809-02-12 died:1882-04-19 at age:73)

Creationists claim Darwin said that monkeys turned into humans. No matter how many times we
correct them, they repeat the lie. They know they are wrong, but they compulsively lie anyway.

Why Are there Monkeys?

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed that could not possibly have been formed by numerous,
successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find no such case.

~ Charles Darwin(born:1809-02-12 died:1882-04-19 at age:73)

This frank admission of where to look for the chink in the armour of evolutionary theory was like
blood in the water to the creationist sharks. They searched and searched but found nothing. So they decided to lie
about the existence of irreducible complexity instead. They hoped to get some converts at least from the
naïve
religious camp with sufficient repeated assertion of the lies.

Creationists are Ignorant, Stupid or Insane

It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is
ignorant, stupid or insane.

~ Dr. Richard Dawkins(born:1941-03-26 age:75)

God of the Gaps

Creationists eagerly seek a gap in present-day knowledge or understanding. If an apparent gap is found, it is
assumed that God, by default, must fill it. What worries thoughtful theologians such as
[Dietrich] Bonhoeffer is that gaps shrink as science advances and God is threatened with eventually having nothing
to do and nowhere to hide. What worries scientists is something else. It is an essential part of the scientific
enterprise to admit ignorance, even to exult in ignorance as a challenge to future conquests… Mystics exult
in mystery and want it to stay mysterious. Scientists exult in mystery for a different reason; it gives them
something to do… One of the truly bad effects of religion that it teaches us it is a virtue to be satisfied
with not understanding.

God of the Gaps

Creationists eagerly seek a gap in present-day knowledge or understanding. If an apparent gap is found, it is
assumed that God, by default, must fill it.

~ Dr. Richard Dawkins(born:1941-03-26 age:75)

These temporary and feeble salvos. When science fills in the gap, that argument for God
evaporates. Even when Christians argue a god-like being must be invoked, there is no reason whatsoever to think the
god had to be Jehovah rather than say, Zeus or any of the thousand of other gods man has or does worship, or even
yet another yet undiscovered.

Lack Of Education

I got the impression the only reason they [American creationists] had not seen its [evolution’s]
possibilities before, was that the subject had been totally omitted from their education.

Perfection of Jesus

On the perfection of Jesus:
Yes, Jesus masturbated, but he didn’t come.

~ N. Errantiste(born:1897 died:1911 at age:14)

Fish Licence Creationists

It reminds me of a Monty Python routine where a guy goes into a pet store to get his fish a licence. He is told
they don’t make fish licences. He replies that he has cat licence, why can’t he get a fish licence? but
is told they don’t make cat licences either. So he shows the pet store owner his cat licence. That’s not a cat licence the owner responds, That’s a dog licence.
You just scratched out the word dog and wrote in cat. That’s all the creationists
are doing. They’ve just scratched out religion and in its place put in science.

Creationism is Bogus

Creation science has not entered the curriculum for a reason so simple and so basic that we often forget to
mention it: because it is false and because good teachers understand exactly why it is false. What
could be more destructive of that most fragile yet most precious commodity in our entire intellectual heritage
— good teaching — than a bill forcing honorable teachers to sully their sacred trust by granting equal
treatment to a doctrine not only known to be false, but calculated to undermine any general understanding of
science as an enterprise?

~ Dr. Stephen Jay Gould(born:1941-09-10 died:2002-05-20 at age:60)

Evolution Can Be Tested

Creationist critics often charge that evolution cannot be tested and therefore cannot be viewed as a properly
scientific subject at all. This claim is rhetorical nonsense.

~ Dr. Stephen Jay Gould(born:1941-09-10 died:2002-05-20 at age:60)

Hidden Past

They[creationists] have this absurd notion that something that occurs in the past and that is not subject to
direct observation is not provable. That’s nonsense… There is a mystery as to how evolution occurs,
but there is not a whole lot of doubt as to whether it occurs.

~ Dr. Stephen Jay Gould(born:1941-09-10 died:2002-05-20 at age:60).

Masquerade

Pseudoscience known by its supporters as scientific creationism is strict Genesis
literalism masquerading as science in a cynical attempt to bypass the First Amendment and win legislatively
mandated inclusion of particular (and minority) religious views into public school curricula… Intense
debates about how evolution occurs display science at its most exciting, but provide no solace (only phony
ammunition by wilful distortion) to strict fundamentalists.

~ Dr. Stephen Jay Gould(born:1941-09-10 died:2002-05-20 at age:60)

Testing Evolution

Creationist critics often charge that evolution cannot be tested and therefore cannot be viewed as a properly
scientific subject at all. This claim is rhetorical nonsense.

~ Dr. Stephen Jay Gould(born:1941-09-10 died:2002-05-20 at age:60)

On the contrary, it is the creationists with an untestable hypothesis. Creationism makes no
predictions. There is no telling what a god will do.

Who Should You Trust

Who should you trust, god or the scientists?

~ Ken Ham(born:1951-10-20 age:65)

If there were a creator deity and if there were a way of asking him questions, obviously he would
be the expert, unless he were suffering from some sort of supernatural Alzheimers. But that is not who Ken
Ham’s followers are asking. They are asking an old book, penned by anonymous people 3000 years ago. A book is not the same thing as god, even though it is purported to have been penned
by god. There is ample evidence the bible is a forgery. So if Ken Ham were honest, he would have asked Who should you trust, bronze age desert dwellers or modern scientists?

In general, someone with his hand is your pocket is less trustworthy than somebody who is not trying to charm
you out of your money.

Atheist Challenge

You think you’re so smart, Mr. Atheist. Explain calculus in three sentences that a math-illiterate person
like me could understand. I bet you can’t. That proves calculus is the work of the devil and Jesus is our
lord.

~ Jael

This is yet another argument from ignorance.

My Refusal to Study Physics Proves God

You think you’re so smart, Mr. Atheist. Explain time dilation and relativity in three sentences that a
science-illiterate person like me could understand. I bet you can’t. That proves evolution is a crock and
Jesus is our lord.

~ Jael

My Stupidity Proves Creationism

You think you’re so smart, Mr. Atheist. Explain speciation in evolution in three sentences that a
science-illiterate person like me could understand. I bet you can’t. That proves evolution is a crock and
Jesus is our lord.

~ Jael

The Purpose Of Earwax and God

You think you’re so smart, Mr. Atheist. What is ear wax for? I bet you don’t know. That proves
evolution is a crock and Jesus is our lord.

~ Jael

Limits On The Universe

The universe couldn't have come into existence by
it self… that’s crazy… what are the chance of a little energy coming
out of nothing?

~ John Johnson

You have a brain the size of a cantaloupe. How is that brain supposed to know for certain what the
entire universe may or may not do, especially when that brain has carefully avoided learning anything about how the
cosmos does behave?

But Quantum Mechanics shows particles pop into and out of existence all the time and the universe
was smaller than an atom at the big bang. So no big deal. Your computer could not work if that were not so.

What I find really odd, is in your view, if you add a wizard and a magic wand, then the universe
has no problem popping into existence. The wizard explains nothing. It just adds the puzzles where did the wizard
come from? Who made the wizard’s gown? Where did the wand come from? How does waving a wand create universes?
How does the wand know what the wizard wants to create? Does it have an ESP (Extra Sensory Perception)
interface? Where is the wizard before he creates space? What was he doing before he got into the creation business?
What is he doing now the creation is over and he has become undetectable? You have not explained anything. You have
just exploded the complexity of the problem.

How Creationists Cheat

Our strategy has been to change the subject, a bit so that we can get the issue of Intelligent Design, which
really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.

Creation of Life

To recreate the conditions thought to exist on Earth when life began, scientists used a giant laser to ignite
chemical reactions that converted a substance found on the early Earth into the molecular building blocks of
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid), the blueprint for life.

Creationists claim that the spontaneous creation of DNA
is impossible. It looks like that probably is not so. After all, we having been doing it every day in the lab for
years. Regroup creationists! Hint: claim that it is a miracle that the building blocks of
DNA spontaneously form. Claim, as usual without
evidence, that Jehovah, the master chemist of the bible, so designed chemistry that this could happen automatically
in the natural course of things, like an aquarist setting up an automated fish feeder so that his direct action is
no longer required.

Monophyly

Evolution never permits one thing to turn into another, fundamentally different sort
of thing. All evolution is just a matter of incremental, superficial changes being slowly compiled atop various
tiers of fundamental changes. Thus every new species, genus or higher taxa that ever evolved was just a modified
version of whatever its ancestors were.

And those successive levels of similarity represent taxonomic clades which will forever encompass all the
descendants of that clade to matter how different they eventually become.

~ Ernst Walter Mayr(born:1904-07-05 died:2005-02-03 at age:100)

Law of Monophyletic Variation

Why then does every creationist publicly proclaim the very opposite, that evolution is all about
the creation of bizarre chimeras like crocoducks and spontaneous generation of new radically different lifeforms
out of nothing? That is a straw man argument, otherwise known as lying about your opponent’s position to more
easily ridicule it. The lie is an admission creationists have no truthful arguments against evolution. Even
they know they have to lie to support creationism. Even they know creationism is
false. They support it for ulterior motives, usually financial. The humour of it is the creationists are the ones
who assert new species appeared out of nothing by magic. They are trying to tar evolutionists with their own absurd
beliefs.

Creationist Polar Bears

If polar bears are [the] dominant [predator] in the Arctic, then there would seem to have been no need for them
to evolve a white-coloured form of camouflage.

~ Hugh William Montifiore(born:1920-05-12 died:2005-05-13 at age:85)
Bishop of Birmingham, in Probability of God.

This an outrageously idiotic argument from ignorance, one of the
classical logical fallacies. Just because the bishop is
too clueless to come up with an explanation, he asserts that Darwinian theory could not possibly come up with an
explanation. It therefore must be the God Jehovah’s whim. Had he any intellectual integrity, he would have
asked a professional zoologist for a Darwinian explanation before using this example in his book. The answer why
polar bears need camouflage is obvious to anyone who has ever watched polar bears sneak up on seals even from an
armchair watching nature documentaries.

Ignoring The Evidence

When science and the Bible differ, science has obviously misinterpreted its data.

~ Henry Morris(born:1918-10-06 died:2006-02-25 at age:87)
Institute for Creation Research

To me it is obviously the reverse. Scientists present many reasons why they believe what they do.
Creationists do not.

Defending Creationism

It is impossible to defend creationism without lying.

~ Aron Ra (née L. Aron
Nelson)(born:1962-10-15 age:54)

Who Knows What?

Science does not know everything. Religion knows nothing.

~ Aron Ra (née L. Aron
Nelson)(born:1962-10-15 age:54)

Creationism is as Silly as an Earth-Centred Universe

Society would not tolerate legislation declaring that the theory that the sun circles the earth be given equal
time with the theory of a heliocentric solar system; it should not pay attention to the equally preposterous
notions of scientific creationism

~ Robert Ornstein

Leonardo Was Not A Creationist

During a trip to an Apennine mountaintop, [Leonardo da Vinci] had discovered the fossilised remains of shellfish
that ordinarily lived on the ocean floor. How did this come about? The conventional theological wisdom was that the
Great Flood of Noah had inundated the mountaintops and carried the clams and oysters with it. Leonardo, remembering
that the Bible says that the flood lasted only forty days, attempted to calculate whether this would be sufficient
time to carry the shellfish with them, even if the mountaintops were inundated. During what state in the life cycle
of the shellfish had they been deposited? — and so on. He came to the conclusion this didn’t work and
proposed a quite daring alternative; namely, that over immense vistas of geological time the mountaintops had
pushed up through the oceans. And that posed all sorts of theological difficulties. But it is the correct answer,
as I think it’s fair to say it has been definitively established in our time.

I think what he meant is there are two kinds of evangelical Christians: the con artists who run
the show and the gullible, naïve
flock who seriously believe the nonsense they are told. The people selling creationism don’t believe it
themselves. You can tell by all the outrageously dishonest ploys they use.

Definition of Evolution

Biological evolution is defined as the descent of living things from ancestors from which they differ. Evolution
kicks in after there is something, like a replicating structure, to evolve. So the origin of life preceded
evolution and is conceptually distinct from it.

Little Has Changed

Yet wilfully ignorant creationists claim that for evolution to exist it must proceed faster than
the hands of a clock, with creatures morphing before your eyes, like Disney’s Shaggy Dog or Star Trek’s
salt monster.

Creationist Strategies

In the United States, the new creationist movement has convinced many people and their political servants that
scientists are being unfair in not supporting the teaching of alternatives to evolution in science classes. They
say it is censorship to exclude intelligent design from those classes. The usual argument raised against teaching
intelligent design is that it unconstitutionally promotes religion. Design promoters, however, insist that they
have no particular designer in mind. No one believes them, but skilled lawyers arguing for the cause of
impartiality on their behalf could probably prevail in court. In any case, a better argument exists: Intelligent
design theory, as currently formulated by its leading proponents, should not be taught in science classes because
it is provably wrong.

~ Victor J. Stenger(born:1935-01-29 died:2014-08-27 at age:79)

Deny Creationists Their Lies

When people start using science to argue for their specific beliefs and delusions, to try to claim that
they’re supported by science, then scientists at least have to speak up and say, You re welcome to your delusions, but don’t say that they’re supported by science.

~ Victor J. Stenger(born:1935-01-29 died:2014-08-27 at age:79)

Economy of Thought

The argument from design rests on the notion that everything, but God, must come from something. However, once
you agree that it is logically possible for an entity to exist that was not itself created, namely God, then that
entity can just as well be the universe itself. Indeed, this is a more economical possibility, not requiring the
additional hypothesis of a supernatural power outside the universe… To [creationists], it is not a matter of
logic anyway, but common sense. They see no way that the universe could have just happened, without intent.
How can something come from nothing? they continue to ask, never wondering how God came
from nothing.

~ Victor J. Stenger(born:1935-01-29 died:2014-08-27 at age:79)

Something From Nothing

Something can’t come from nothing

~ David VanderHoff

But that is not true. I have explained to you over and over that Quantum Mechanics has known for a
century that particles pop into and out of existence without cause all the time. You pretend not to hear. Further,
the universe at the time of the big bang was less than the size of an atom. I know it violates your intuition.
Don’t feel bad. It boggled Einstein too.

But let’s assume you found some valid variant of this argument. Let’s assume you
demonstrated that something must have preexisted the universe and it created the universe. However, that does not
tell you a damn thing about it. It might be a mortal advanced being living in another multiverse. It might be
Ganesh. It might be some creative force field. It need have nothing at all in common with Jehovah. You have no idea
where it came from, or any of its attributes, other than it is capable (perhaps working as a team) of creating
universes. You have no evidence at all the creation occurred in a way remotely like that described in Genesis. You
have no idea how it created the universe. You have no idea of its personality or why it created the universe.

William Lane Craig at that point does a magician sleight of mouth and tries to pretend the only
conceivable creator would be Jehovah/Jesus and that he has just proved Jesus was born of a virgin and died for your
sins. The dishonesty makes me heave. I feel unclean to be living on the same planet with that slimebag.

Chance or God?

Did all this happen by chance or by intelligent design? [referring to a complex plant, the Dutchman’s
pipe]

~ The Watchtower
A Jehovah’s Witness creationist publication.

Neither. It happened by natural selection which is anything but random and does not consciously
design or use a designer. You would think by now the J.W. administration would have read at least one book on what
evolutionary theory claims so they could attempt to more convincingly refute it. They seem content with straw man
arguments unchanged since the 1800s. What they are doing is fraud — deliberately
misstating evolutionary theory.

A Creationist Lie

living cells — which Darwin thought were mere blobs of protoplasm — actually consist of countless
molecular machines that have the hallmarks of design.

Since evolution is a demonstrable fact, if the Bishop is correct, then the revealed relations of creation must be false.

Creation ⇒ God?

God exists and He can be seen to exist by what has been created.

~ Willpower242 of YouTube

That is a conclusion of someone who knows nothing about science, relying purely on intuition.
Every time science tackles a problem once thought the purview of god, e.g. lightning, disease or weather, science
discovers it is controlled by natural laws. There is absolutely no sign of a deity tweaking the workings of the
universe, never, not once. We even understand the big bang back to 1 billionth of a second
after the start. We have created life in the laboratory by artificially creating DNA
sequences. We don’t know everything, but everything so far has been natural causes. So the creation is not
necessarily evidence for a god. It is much more likely to be natural causes too. Attributing the supernatural is a
childish way of saying I don’t know.

Second the bible’s account of creation is ridiculous on 1000+
particulars. If a god created the universe, it was not the god of the bible. Some creationists have resorted to
claiming god faked many things to make it look like the universe were 13 billion years old
and evolution were true. Would it not be more plausible that they actually are true?

The other argument Christians use is the bible. They claim it is inerrant and so perfect it had to
have been authored by a supernatural being. This a preposterous claim. Whomever wrote the bible knew only what
desert dwellers 3000 years ago knew. The creator of the universe would know far more than
we do about how universes work. The authors of the bible thought π was 3, the earth
was flat, rabbits chew their cud, the best way to cure leprosy was animal sacrifice and dove blood. Further the
thousands of errors and inconsistencies point to incompetent human authors not a superhuman author. It is insulting
to Jehovah to assert that sloppy piece of work is his doing.

Without a supernatural bible, its entire authority collapses, including its cock-eyed creation
myths and, of course, creationism and its barbaric morality.